Hey Asya!
Iâve seen that youâve received a comment prize on this. Congratulations! I have found it interesting.
I was wondering: you give these two reasons for rejecting a funding application
Project would be good if executed exceptionally well, but applicant doesnât have a track record in this area, and there are no references that I trust to be calibrated to vouch for their ability.
Applicant wants to do research on some topic, but their previous research on similar topics doesnât seem very good.
My question is: what method would you use to evaluate the track record of someone who has not done a Ph.D. in AI Safety, but rather on something like Physics (my case :) )? Do you expect the applicant to have some track record in AI Safety research?
I do not plan on applying for funding on the short term, but I think I would find some intuition on this valuable. I also ask because I find it hard to calibrate myself on the quality of my own research.
Hey! I definitely donât expect people starting AI safety research to have a track record doing AI safety workâin fact, I think some of our most valuable grants are paying for smart people to transition into AI safety from other fields. I donât know the details of your situation, but in general I donât think âformer physics student starting AI safety workâ fits into the category of âproject would be good if executed exceptionally wellâ. In that case, I think most of the value would come from supporting the transition of someone who could potentially be really good, rather than from the object-level work itself.
In the case of other technical Ph.D.s, I generally check whether their work is impressive in the context of their field, whether their academic credentials are impressive, what their references have to say. I also place a lot of weight on whether their proposal makes sense and shows an understanding of the topic, and on my own impressions of the person after talking to them.
I do want to emphasize that âpaying a smart person to test their fit for AI safetyâ is a really good use of money from my perspectiveâif the person turns out to be good, Iâve in some sense paid for a whole lifetime of high-quality AI safety research. So I think my bar is not as high as it is when evaluating grant proposals for object-level work from people I already know.
Hey Asya! Iâve seen that youâve received a comment prize on this. Congratulations! I have found it interesting. I was wondering: you give these two reasons for rejecting a funding application
Project would be good if executed exceptionally well, but applicant doesnât have a track record in this area, and there are no references that I trust to be calibrated to vouch for their ability.
Applicant wants to do research on some topic, but their previous research on similar topics doesnât seem very good.
My question is: what method would you use to evaluate the track record of someone who has not done a Ph.D. in AI Safety, but rather on something like Physics (my case :) )? Do you expect the applicant to have some track record in AI Safety research? I do not plan on applying for funding on the short term, but I think I would find some intuition on this valuable. I also ask because I find it hard to calibrate myself on the quality of my own research.
Hey! I definitely donât expect people starting AI safety research to have a track record doing AI safety workâin fact, I think some of our most valuable grants are paying for smart people to transition into AI safety from other fields. I donât know the details of your situation, but in general I donât think âformer physics student starting AI safety workâ fits into the category of âproject would be good if executed exceptionally wellâ. In that case, I think most of the value would come from supporting the transition of someone who could potentially be really good, rather than from the object-level work itself.
In the case of other technical Ph.D.s, I generally check whether their work is impressive in the context of their field, whether their academic credentials are impressive, what their references have to say. I also place a lot of weight on whether their proposal makes sense and shows an understanding of the topic, and on my own impressions of the person after talking to them.
I do want to emphasize that âpaying a smart person to test their fit for AI safetyâ is a really good use of money from my perspectiveâif the person turns out to be good, Iâve in some sense paid for a whole lifetime of high-quality AI safety research. So I think my bar is not as high as it is when evaluating grant proposals for object-level work from people I already know.